Kurieuo wrote:Are we saved based upon belief in truth propositions, or believing in Christ?
Can on be have without the other?

I don't see how we could have one without the other. We are saved through faith in Christ. And we need to know the truth about who Christ is, and what he's done, don't we?

Hello, Person v Promise debate.

Proinsias wrote:I don't think you are hearing me. Preference for ice cream is a moral issue

And that, brothers and sisters, is the kind of foolishness you get people who insist on denying biblical theism. A good illustration of any as the length people will go to avoid acknowledging basic truths.

RickD wrote:
Where in scripture is believing in the Trinity a prerequisite for salvation, or being a Christian?
...
But what if one believes Christ is God, but has an issue with the Holy Spirit being the third person? I just don't see that one has to believe the Holy Spirit is a person, in order to be saved.

These are two passages of Scripture that popped into my head when I read your post.

Matthew 12:30-32

30 “Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters. 31 And so I tell you, every kind of sin and slander can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. 32 Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.

Romans 8:9-11

9 You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ. 10 But if Christ is in you, then even though your body is subject to death because of sin, the Spirit gives life because of righteousness. 11 And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of his Spirit who lives in you.

In Christ

What I'm getting at, is does one need to have an understanding of the Holy Spirit being a person in the Trinity, in order to be saved? For example, one believes that Jesus Christ is God, and trusts in him for salvation. And while one believes in the personhood of God the Father, and believes in the personhood of Christ the Son, and believes that the Holy Spirit is the spirit of God, but the Holy Spirit is not a person, can that person be saved.

I would say yes. And it also answers the question that I asked, "If someone doesn't believe in the Trinity, can he be saved?"

1 Corinthians 1:99 God is faithful, through whom you were called into fellowship with His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.

Audie wrote:
"Christianity is not a joke, but it has some very poor representatives."

Very bad feelings. It was (is?) an interfamily squabble among dyed-in-the-wool free grace folks. It was part of the crossless gospel controversy that Zane Hodges introduced into that part of the theological spectrum. The specific details of that context aside, though, it's a fitting (and ironic, in some ways) reference. On the one hand, you have people who say that we place our faith in a person (Jesus), and we are therefore saved. On the other, you have people who say that to believe in Jesus is to accept certain facts to be true about Him. For them, faith is just passive, intellectual persuasion. To think something is true is to believe/have faith. So in the context of this discussion, people who want to make the Trinity a part of the gospel are on the proposition/promise side of the debate. If you believe certain things are true (i.e., the Trinity), then you're saved. But if you place your faith in the person of Christ while not believing certain things (i.e., the Trinity), then you are not saved. More basically, on one side, salvation is obtained upon reaching a certain level of orthodoxy (and, of course, different people mark that level differently); on the other, salvation obtained through a relation with a person.

Oversimplified, I know, and there's little black and white or either/or's here. People on the promise/proposition side do recognize you are believing a person; and people on the "person" side acknowledge that you have to believe in the right person, such that if you disbelieve certain things then you can't say you believe in the person at all. So it's a matter of how we weigh it more than anything else. But the basic idea above still holds at the bottom of the discussion, I think.

Proinsias wrote:I don't think you are hearing me. Preference for ice cream is a moral issue

And that, brothers and sisters, is the kind of foolishness you get people who insist on denying biblical theism. A good illustration of any as the length people will go to avoid acknowledging basic truths.

IceMobster wrote:Hmmm, aligning of the will makes sense. I do not see how that is connected to Jesus not doing anything He does not see the Father do and that everything Jesus did, He did at the direction of the Father.
Could you elaborate on this and give examples?

See John 5:19, "Jesus gave them this answer: 'Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does.'"

See also John 5:30; 7:18; 12:49-50; 14:31.

Note 7:18 for special emphasis, and then consider 1 Cor 2:13 and 1 Pet 4:11.

Jesus, as God, did more than just walk around doing divine things. More than that, as man, He truly lived as man. And as man, He fully submitted to the Father in all things. He is the only human being who has ever done so. And in so doing, an amazing thing happens. In the man Jesus Christ, the human will and the divine will are perfectly aligned. If you know your biblical history, you know that was broken when Adam ate the forbidden fruit, and ever since then, man and God have been out of sync, so to speak--the former in rebellion to the latter. But in Jesus, mankind himself is saved, because Jesus becomes the Second Adam. Just like you were born with Adam's fallen nature, so if you are born again in Christ, you receive His nature--partially in this life and ultimately in the next. That's why the resurrection of Jesus is so important. Christ was perfectly aligned with the Father, and so since Christ is both man and God, He relates to the Father and we to Him (that is, to Jesus), and in so doing, we are related to the Father. So it turns out to be extremely important for Jesus to act not out of His divinity but out of His humanity. And in acting out of His humanity, He redeems humanity by fully submitting it to the Father.

Heh, what is the Scriptural basis for that? Nowhere does it say that he let the HS empower him, even though the result kinda makes sense.

I could offer more, especially by way of serious commentary on Phil 2:5-11 and its implications to take only one example, but I think that should suffice for now.

All the ones you quoted from John makes it seem as if Christ is in ranking lower to God (which is a heresy of ranking, idk how you say it in English) and, since incapable of doing certain things, not God. No need to point out on the Jesus' humanity. He is 100% God and 100% human, is he not?

Kurieuo wrote:

IceMobster wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:

IceMobster wrote:If Jesus is God, why did he pray to God (which is supported by Scripture on various places)?
Why does Jesus not say that he is God anywhere in the Scripture?

Bonus question: I have no idea what Holy Spirit's role is in either the Trinity or the world, so explain. I see HS as utterly useless. Even though I know it is obviously not the teaching of the Trinity, I see HS as just a name for God's work in the world. So, yeah, give me your best concerning this 3 questions.

Let me put forward questions that abstract from the specifics of why or how.

Question 1) If God exists, then is it logically possible (i.e., there is nothing contradictory) for God to come down to Earth, be born and dwell amongst in human form?

Question 2) If one positively affirms (1), then Who is keeping things running while God gives Himself over to human nature and visits Earth in human form?

Except there is a fallacy here. This implies that God isn't omnipotent since He could not both be 100% human & 100% God whilst "keep running the universe" or "holding the helm" as you state later.

Challenges God's omnipotence in the same way the question, "Can God create a rock so big that He can't lift it?" or "Can God create a square circle?" does. Nonsense remains nonsense even when you talk it about God.

Now, why do you believe that logically God must exist; probably because you see God as a necessary foundational source for everything that exists or something the like, right? If God is the source of all existence, then everything that exists MUST be necessarily be sustained by God in existence. Remove God from the equation, or whatever He is doing to sustain everything in existence, then it all just vanishes like smoke. God as the Aseity, means ALL is dependent upon such.

In fact, quite the opposite to challenging God's omnipotence, Christian theology in embracing God's nature as relational, indeed even social, means God as the Father through the Holy Spirit can continue running the universe and keeping everything in existence while Christ empties Himself of such a role in taking up human nature.

Re: Jesus' nature, it doesn't follow that because Christ gave up certain Divine rights if you will, that He is any less than God the Father. Consider Philippians 2:1-11 where Christ's "emptied Himself" when entering into our world in human form.

1Therefore if there is any encouragement in Christ, if there is any consolation of love, if there is any fellowship of the Spirit, if any affection and compassion, 2make my joy complete by being of the same mind, maintaining the same love, united in spirit, intent on one purpose. 3Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves; 4do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others. 5Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. 8Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10so that at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Cooking right now, wife is on strike. So I'll get to your next section later.

Yet again, if Christ is God, it would make no bloody problem for such a perfect entity to rule the universe and sacrifice for humanity.

Kurieuo wrote:
Sure, this is a theological question. Here is my logic.

God as the logically necessary being, means God is the source of all existence.
As the source of all existence, anything that exists does so because God as the source sustains such into existence.
That would go for every single atom in the universe bouncing around as well as creatures and the greater universe.
Therefore, the only kind of randomity that could be had is through what I'd term an "apparent randomity".

Now I could leave it there and just wait for your questions. But, to give a more extended explanation.

In our world, God sets in place a stable world (instead of world full of chaos) which is held together by natural laws He sustains. Given God would be the source of all existence, on a foundational level EVERYTHING THAT EXISTS is running on God. God keeps the fabric of our world and how it runs continually existing. So we experience everything running on laws in a rather stable and even predictable manner because it is running on God.

Now although results based upon physical laws and the like are predictable, some results might appear to be quite random. In actuality what appears to be a random roll of the dice, the dice and rolling is actually sustained by God in existence every which way. God allows natural laws to play out as though a dice is being rolled, but all the while God is actually turning the dice to land on the numbers they do. They land on the numbers they do according to the "randomiser rules" created which God continually upholds (i.e., natural laws) and keeps in play. Nothing in the world happens without God's sustaining such. Therefore nothing is truly random.

As a final comment, the above reasoning is dependent upon God as the logically necessary being. If you understand how we theologians get to that, then everything else follows. So if you wish to debate the above, then I see you need to attack God as the logically necessary being i.e., the foundational something which has always existed upon which everything that exists is founded upon.

Aye, you reminded me of that word I wrote on the paper I need to think about. Randomness. Indeed, nothing is truly random since (not if ) God is its core.
Anyway, bloody again. How is incarnation to Christ blocking Him from performing so??????????????????????????????????????................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ I don't see how that makes sense. It makes Him imperfect. Renders Him weak...........................

Kurieuo wrote:

IceMobster wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:I believe these two questions push one to entertain at least a duality in God of some sort, whether such be essential to God's nature or something God's creates within Himself. So then, how does the communion between such work, well, let theologians discuss and nut out.

Fine. Why a 3rd persona out of the blue then?

This is going to get complicated very quickly, but I'll take you on a journey through my thoughts of old.

You are right that a 3rd person appears out of the blue when merely reflecting upon the duality of roles necessary in God who needs to sustain the universe while entering into creation. Yet, then we're only discussing the subject matter at hand because we have "content" to consider provided by Scripture, so then it's not entirely out of the blue, but rather more a question of what should we make of a third person like the Holy Spirit? Let me extend here my thoughts.

Firstly, I'll freely acknowledge, and see nothing wrong with acknowledging, many influences come from Scripture in what are revealed to be roles of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit in the Godhead. Further, there are different Christian beliefs on the procession of the Holy Spirit, one all agree upon is that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father. There is controversy over whether the Holy Spirit also proceeds from the Son (i.e., look into Filioque).

Now working with Trinitarian thoughts, let me reflect upon the nature of God and His relationship to the world (the created order) in just free-thinking Kurieuo style which many can find painful. My purpose here is to provide coherent picture between reason and special revelation (Scripture) as to necessary roles of God in relation to a created order.

The following thoughts I had came from when I accepted Panentheism (all exists in God), which has since kind of been usurped in my thinking by Divine Simplicity. The main difference is that DS doesn't (or shouldn't) talk of God and creation in terms of properties-substance talk, but rather in terms of potentialities-actualities. Those who are more visual and very conceptual often lean towards property-substance language, yet I think talking in terms of potentialities and actualities is more "ontologically proper" if you will (that is, a truer reflection of reality).

Nonetheless, I see benefits to presenting my older substance-based view of God here.

If God is the necessary something that has always existed (the Aseity), it made sense for me to conceptualise that anything created can only be composed of God Himself, a divine spiritual substance of sorts. Therefore, I quite naturally logically embraced "all-in-God" (pan-en-theism).

Nonetheless, there needs to be some distinction made within God, splitting the boundary between "God Himself" and the created order which somehow bubbles out of God's substance and is sustained in its own right. If there is no separation, then one actually believes in Pantheism (all is God), which seems far from true and Christians cannot affirm. Therefore, given creation, there is a role that God must fulfill of eternally separating from Himself and yet sustaining all of creation in its own right.

Now for God to enter into true relations with us creatures necessarily means another role is needed. If God just exists as the necessary being that transcends all of creation (1), yet the universe and all of creation needs to be sustained in existence separately from the actual divine substance it is comprised (2), now for God to Himself enter into the created order necessitates requiring God to superimpose Himself within the created order in Himself to be personally present along side us (3).

Christ incarnate, God in human form, is like a "superposition" (to borrow terminology from quantum mechanics) of God, where God personally and directly enters into the sustained created order within Himself. Now, entering into the created order, "Jesus" becomes measurable in many ways, the immeasurable becomes measurable but it doesn't change His true nature or identity.

Now you'll notice I placed (1), (2) and (3) beside roles in my second-last paragraph above. This was to mark out three roles my Kurieuo thinking saw as being logically necessary. It is interesting that these roles kind of line up to what we are presented with in Scripture of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The Word (Christ) created and nothing that was made and brought into existence was made except through Christ. (John 1) Therefore, when actively personally involved in the world, it seems that Christ is fulfills role #3. Further, the Holy Spirit is often represented as the invisible fabric that holds things together. For example, consider having fellowship and being united in spirit of Philippians 2:1-2; is such merely empty words or is there some invisible fabric that exists that we can be joined to? The Holy Spirit seems a lot like the glue, does a lot of the invisible work that keeps everything together. So the role of the Spirit seems to cohere with role #2. And now, the Father who appears to transcend, judge and remain sovereign over all, clearly role #1.

I expect I'll need to clarify some things since these thoughts are now much more complicated. But, if you wanted simple answers then I'd expect you to ask more simple questions like, "how's the weather in Oz?". I suspect you don't care much about the weather here though.

Nah, it wasn't complicated at all. I see what you mean. Yet again, I still reckon you give too little "credit" to God. As if He is not the one who could engage into personal relationship with us (post or pre Christ) and remain to be an aseity and sovereign.

You talk of potentialities-actualities as opposed to properties-substance, yet I am quite sure God has no such thing as possible potentialities. God is perfect and fully actualized.
No, there needs not to be some distinction within God.

Yeah Filioque is a pretty dumb reason to serve as one of the reasons for a schism. I am aware it is not just that, but, eh...

As for pantheism, we are made in the image of God even though we do not have his substance which would lead to a predetermination problem (what Plotinus encountered). Anyway, what does "being created in the image of God" mean to you? There are different interpretations, you know.

Oh, and I hope you didn't expect the how's the weather question. I dislike empty talk and formalities. So, how are you? Oh, wait...

B. W. wrote:
I could through the entire Old Testament and New as well but John's book sum's all these up consciously.

Fine, show me where Christ claims he is God in the OT, lol.
You do realize John 1 or YHWH telling his name doesn't count as Christ claiming divinity?...

Look at Isa 45:23 again and compare with John 1:1,2,3,14 and you will notice the word - WORD as used in Isaiah 45:23

Except this word is not the Word. You see it as so only because you are biased towards Christ (which I don't mean in a negative way).

IceMobster wrote:If Jesus is God, why did he pray to God (which is supported by Scripture on various places)?
Why does Jesus not say that he is God anywhere in the Scripture?

B. W. wrote:
He did, did you not just read Isa 45:21,23 where is stated that only God can forgive sins and you have Jesus saying what in Luke 5:21,22,23?

So, what? This could be done by any Jew who knew the OT well enough.

B. W. wrote:
Isa 43:11 reveals what?

Reveals that there is saving through God. Doesn't say Jesus, does it?!
Same with Hosea

B. W. wrote:

IceMobster wrote:And yes Jesus claimed he is God in the bible, by the titles Son of Man and Son of God...

As well as in: John 20:28, John 5:23, John 9:35-38, John 14:9

Why are all of them from the Gospel of John??

B. W. wrote:
So you would actually read the book of John...
John 10:28-30 mentions what and now re-read Philippians 2:6-11 again and re-read the post concerning the example of the orange ..

Well, another one from John. Yeah, because I would otherwise not read the Gospel of John. Man, come on.
Can't you at least see where I am coming from? Everywhere (or most) Jesus says he is God comes from that book. Doesn't it look a tiny bit suspicious? Why did the other evangelist not "record" Jesus say that? Why did God not, through His providence, save the Quelle (a set of logias (sayings)) which were used in both Matthew and Luke's Gospel? Plus another 2 sources, one for each, respectively. Then there comes John all like Jesus says he is God here and here and here.

Not to mention that between Jesus and them being done passed ~60 years. Connect the dots, huh?

B. W. wrote:
The question comes then, what do you you do with Jesus Ice?

I have no bloody idea! Why don't you tell me? Or rather, why don't you ask God to help since prayers do matter and will help, right? Except when they do not, that is fine.
Also, I do not ask these questions only for myself. The reason for me opening this topic is some indoctrinated Muslim talking s#it about Christianity and I was too lazy to look up the verses.

Now I ask you, where is my divine revelation? (Note this is not reeeeeeally a question since I do not ask God for anything. I don't deserve that. Even though a revelation would be nice huh............) Intellectually I am not convinced. Too many holes to simply fill them with faith.

B. W. wrote:
Continue to be like like the those who put him on trial can sought his extermination for basphming the world's system?

I am not entirely sure this is a grammatically correct sentence as I do not quite understand it. Probably compares me with those who put him on trial. What's this with blaspheming the world's system? Bashing the world's system?
Well, even though I see you mean it as metaphorical, I wouldn't put him to trial.
"Oh, but you already are in both your heart and your mouth."
Well, no s#it. Evidence points me to the contrary. Also, lack of faith.

Having read the sentence you made correctly down there, yeah blaspheming the world's system is a good thing. Countless others did that as well. So? Yes, some of them were also put on trial.

B. W. wrote:
Look at Isa 48:12,16,17

God is speaking in these verses as the context describes

Isa 48:12 "Listen to Me, O Jacob, even Israel whom I called; I am He, I am the first, I am also the last." NASB

Isa 48:16-17 "Come near to Me, listen to this: From the first I have not spoken in secret, From the time it took place, I was there. And now the Lord GOD has sent Me, and His Spirit." 17 Thus says the LORD, your Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel, "I am the LORD your God, who teaches you to profit, Who leads you in the way you should go." NASB

Why did the Jews not make a concept of the Holy Spirit if it states here "His Spirit"?
Nah, they saw it as a synonym for having God by their side. Spirit of God protecting them, watching over them...
Christians come and they start interpreting it so that it fits them. Yeah, I could be wrong but so could you simply because of the first question I posed.

B. W. wrote:
What did Jesus say in Rev 1:17,18 and Rev 1:8 and Rev 22:13 compare with Isa 41:4,

Jesus did declare who He is... and the bible plainly teaches who the Holy Spirit is.

What Jesus allegedly said in a vision* ... to some guy on mushrooms having visions, lol. But yeah, sorry for trying to doubt the authenticity of the book which was, similarly to the Gospel of John, written in 50+ years after Jesus.

B. W. wrote:
You accuse that an orange can have distinctions within its own being, yet God cannot?

"Not all parts of the orange share the same essence, attributes and function. It is simply not true. Furthermore, your comparison reduces and splits God into parts which is also incorrect."
I am sure you would agree all personas of the Godhead have the same essence. Attributes, as well, right? What of the functions, then? God to stay transcendent, Jesus to personally visit and restore humanity with his sacrifice and Holy Spirit to do what exactly? Stay with us till the end of times and lead us to the Light? Oh, because God can't do that? Won't do that? Leaves it to the rest to fulfill some prophecy? Come on...

B. W. wrote:
Isa 48:3 "I declared the former things long ago And they went forth from My mouth, and I proclaimed them. Suddenly I acted, and they came to pass. 4 "Because I know that you are obstinate, And your neck is an iron sinew And your forehead bronze, 5 Therefore I declared them to you long ago, Before they took place I proclaimed them to you, So that you would not say, 'My idol has done them, And my graven image and my molten image have commanded them.' 6 "You have heard; look at all this. And you, will you not declare it? I proclaim to you new things from this time, Even hidden things which you have not known." NASB

Philippians 2:5-11

How is this connected?

B. W. wrote:

IceMobster wrote: Romans 1:20 reveal what exactly? You mean like there being named 3 things (invisible attributes, eternal power, divine nature) it points to a Triune God? Lol.

God is incomprehensible to us yet I see everyone talking of Him in a very leisure way as if He is their neighbour and they know everything about Him. But let's put that aside.

I've read your comparison once before and I didn't react to it because the comparison is incorrect. Not all parts of the orange share the same essence, attributes and function. It is simply not true. Furthermore, your comparison reduces and splits God into parts which is also incorrect.

Moreover, you conclude with: " but the reality is it is all 100 percent all one orange and our dissection cannot disprove that it is not all one orange either"

Well, of course it is one orange, but it has parts which serve different functions and which consists of different material and each of those parts of the orange (you named 3 of them) have different attributes.

Yeah, just now I've read that you said this example is weak. Well, I'll not accept something which is illogical to my thinking (HS being even worse than Jesus, though).

The zest, fruit and juice is there. In God. You do realize you could have put some 4th thing and, following your logic (well, not logic but thinking with which you tried to persuade me or explain it to me), it would be Fourthune God?

Isaiah 53:1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12 is only a work God himself can do so he sent forth from

How long will you keep putting him on trial to exterminator him and exalt your own pride?

How long will you make assumptions that I am full of pride and that being the only (or one of the main) reason of me not accepting Christ?

B. W. wrote:
Now think for a moment:

The Father, all life flows

The Son outflows the life and creates...

The Holy Spirit establish and empowers life...

All of these can be put to each other. Christ empowers life to those who believe in him. God outflows wisdom to those who are worthy of it. ..........

B. W. wrote:
The three are one and you as Romans 1:20 reveals how, folks ignore the example of the tri-unity of being of living things around them and seek to continue to put God on trial, and continue to betray, mock, scoff, exalt their agendas, place on other burdens they cannot bear, look for spoil, divide others, seek after ruin, spit upon others, beat others down...etc...

I am not putting God on trial. I don't feel I am betraying God. I am not trying to exalt my agenda. I am not seeking to ruin anyone. Not trying to beat anyone down. I am not diving others. ZzzzZzZZzzzZZZZzzzzzZZZzzZZ......

swordfish7 wrote:The trinity is a foundational belief of Christianity and those who reject it can be argued to not be Christians for they are making a false God of there vain imagination. If you go back to church history, they were pretty strong on this point!

I am still baffled at how Mor(m)ons buy into that prophet and book bulls#it. Oh, wait
Ok, I'll give ya that, they are way more bat s#it crazy than you people. <3 <3 <3
I still find it hands down ridiculous that they are called Christians. It is an insult to Christianity, really.

RickD wrote:

swordfish7 wrote:The trinity is a foundational belief of Christianity and those who reject it can be argued to not be Christians for they are making a false God of there vain imagination. If you go back to church history, they were pretty strong on this point!

Where in scripture is believing in the Trinity a prerequisite for salvation, or being a Christian?

This is the trinity God the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost and these three are one.We cannot see God and so cannot know what God looks like,but if we could? God would be all three.Since we were created in the image of God Jesus would look like a human,while the rest of God would look different. We won't fully know until we get to heaven.John 1:18

That was no "hard to understand even for a Christian". Just an opinion, though. I've got one as well, uh...

crochet1949 wrote:Without the trinity we Don't Have salvation. The trinity = God the Father, Jesus Christ His Son and the Holy Spirit.

The virgin birth / the Holy Spirit came upon Mary and she conceived Jesus / both human and Divine. The divine part of Him died on the cross for our sins and rose from the dead bodily after 3 days.

Wait, only the divine part of Him died on the cross? What???

crochet1949 wrote:
The Holy Spirit is Also our teacher -- He allows our understanding to take place. He's also our Comforter.
And the fruits of the Spirit are love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, etc, etc. So these qualities will be apparent in the lives of believers. That's why that verse says 'by their fruits, we shall know them'.

What of God, then? Does He not provide us (fruit us) with love, joy, peace,...???
By His fruits, I know God, then. I see no HS here. God is also my Comforter.

See? Anything you say concerning the HS can be said to God. Not only because "they both have the same essence", but because HS is a name given to God's providence, basically.

Kurieuo wrote:I'm not sure whether you actually covered my questions ACB or just skirted around them. Let me add though, Christ said in the synoptics to let the children come to Him, that one must accept Christ like a child to enter the kingdom of heaven.

Matt 19:13-14

Then some children were brought to Him so that He might lay His hands on them and pray; and the disciples rebuked them. But Jesus said, “Let the children alone, and do not hinder them from coming to Me; for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”

Luke 18:15-17

15And they were bringing even their babies to Him so that He would touch them, but when the disciples saw it, they began rebuking them. 16But Jesus called for them, saying, “Permit the children to come to Me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. 17“Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it at all.”

Mark 10:13-15

13And they were bringing children to Him so that He might touch them; but the disciples rebuked them. 14But when Jesus saw this, He was indignant and said to them, “Permit the children to come to Me; do not hinder them; for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. 15“Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it at all.”

Now, I can tell with my own children, they don't fully understand who Christ is, they don't get the Gospel really... I poke and prod them with questions so I know they're unclear on many things. Yet, I can tell my 8yo daughter is very open to God and fully loves Christ for some reason I can't explain.

Did the Scripture not answer your question?
"that one must accept Christ like a child to enter the kingdom of heaven. "
You needn't be afraid for your children. God is not a retard not allowing the child to Heaven (in case, God forbid, the child dies) simply because the child could not fully understand and therefore accept Christ.

Don't indoctrinate them, eh? I remember my theology teacher telling me how he didn't mention God and is simply patiently waiting for his daughter to ask questions herself.
She has had Confirmation not long ago....
Then there is this other guy who prays with his daughters jointly every night.
So, yeah, there are different approaches, I suppose.
Which one did you take?

Jac3510 wrote:

RickD wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:Are we saved based upon belief in truth propositions, or believing in Christ?
Can on be have without the other?

I don't see how we could have one without the other. We are saved through faith in Christ. And we need to know the truth about who Christ is, and what he's done, don't we?

Hello, Person v Promise debate.

Jac, could you explain?

Well, having doing this for like 2 hours, I almost visited the Lord as my heart almost stopped since I thought I closed the tab in which I had all the responses but Lord is merciful, as you can see.
Oh, wait. It was the HS making me not close the wrong tab, why of course!
Once I was blind but now I see....

Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for You are with me.

Kurieuo wrote:Are we saved based upon belief in truth propositions, or believing in Christ?
Can on be have without the other?

I don't see how we could have one without the other. We are saved through faith in Christ. And we need to know the truth about who Christ is, and what he's done, don't we?

Hello, Person v Promise debate.

I'm not familiar with it. But, I get the feeling bad feelings often fly within such a debate.

Mind you, we were talking about Trinitarian doctrine here, closely tied to Christ's identity of course, but does accepting Christ's promise or as a person mean accepting the Trinity as some appear to here believe?

Rick, your words seemed to think it does not require belief in Trinity, and I liked your post because I tend to agree. While such is the correct believe, one can I believe come to Christ without accepting or understanding the Trinity (if indeed there is one who truly understands!).

Obvious to us all, some truth must be known about Christ, since how can one accept Christ if they know nothing about Him? Yet, then, doesn't Christ know who He is? Creator of all things that came into being, and apart from whom nothing came into being that has come into being. In Him is life.

Given Psalm 19, a chapter strongly supports the testimony of the Lord's natural revelation (v.7), and also Romans 1:18-20 wherein God is plainly known. Understand those who have Christ have the Father, and if one accepts the Father they accept Christ. (John 8:19)

Now of accepting Christ, if one accepts natural revelation then it will follow they'll accept Christ's revealing of Himself. Such may be in the form of visions, dreams, evangelists, hearin the gospel. Those who have the Gospel, the veil is removed far more on the who Christ is, yet for those who haven't heard and have little understanding the veil covering such knowledge of Christ is thicker, yet then their beliefs could be so much more purer.

To put a spin on Christ's words in John 20:29, "Because you have heard of me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not fully heard and yet have believed." I wonder, whether also Jesus' parable of talents/minas has some applicability here, Luke 19:11-27:

11While they were listening to these things, Jesus went on to tell a parable, because He was near Jerusalem, and they supposed that the kingdom of God was going to appear immediately. 12So He said, “A nobleman went to a distant country to receive a kingdom for himself, and then return. 13“And he called ten of his slaves, and gave them ten minas and said to them, ‘Do business with this until I come back.’ 14“But his citizens hated him and sent a delegation after him, saying, ‘We do not want this man to reign over us.’ 15“When he returned, after receiving the kingdom, he ordered that these slaves, to whom he had given the money, be called to him so that he might know what business they had done. 16“The first appeared, saying, ‘Master, your mina has made ten minas more.’ 17“And he said to him, ‘Well done, good slave, because you have been faithful in a very little thing, you are to be in authority over ten cities.’ 18“The second came, saying, ‘Your mina, master, has made five minas.’ 19“And he said to him also, ‘And you are to be over five cities.’ 20“Another came, saying, ‘Master, here is your mina, which I kept put away in a handkerchief; 21for I was afraid of you, because you are an exacting man; you take up what you did not lay down and reap what you did not sow.’ 22“He said to him, ‘By your own words I will judge you, you worthless slave. Did you know that I am an exacting man, taking up what I did not lay down and reaping what I did not sow? 23‘Then why did you not put my money in the bank, and having come, I would have collected it with interest?’ 24“Then he said to the bystanders, ‘Take the mina away from him and give it to the one who has the ten minas.’ 25“And they said to him, ‘Master, he has ten minas already.’ 26“I tell you that to everyone who has, more shall be given, but from the one who does not have, even what he does have shall be taken away. 27“But these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slay them in my presence.”

People may not put a name to Christ, they may not have heard Christ's name, but they know Him in substance rather than nominality through the natural revelation and can concede to this Person being Lord of all creation. Those whose heart responds to God, truly seeks God, such will find Him, (Jeremiah 29:13, Proverbs 8:17, Matt 7:7), knock and the door is opened.

IceMobster wrote:All the ones you quoted from John makes it seem as if Christ is in ranking lower to God (which is a heresy of ranking, idk how you say it in English) and, since incapable of doing certain things, not God. No need to point out on the Jesus' humanity. He is 100% God and 100% human, is he not?

Yes, there is a need to point to His humanity. In His humanity, He is inferior to the Father. See Phil 2:5-11 and my previous comments on that very subject in this thread. In fact, in Jesus' two natures, His human nature is inferior to His divine nature, and thus the alignment. Perhaps you are not aware that the Church has always held that in Christ there are two wills and two intellects--the human and the divine. And in Christ, the human will and human intellect are perfectly submitted to and aligned with the divine will and divine intellect.

So it is not a heresy to say that Christ is subordinate to the Father. The heresy of subordinationism relates to an idea of a hierarchy in the Trinity itself, where the Father would be superior to the Son and the Spirit in a third place of sorts. That is a heresy. All three Persons are absolutely coequal in all ways qua the divine nature (because the Persons just are that nature!). But the Second Person has a human nature in addition to the divine, and He is inferior to the other two in virtue of that human nature. That is why He is directed by the Father (through the Holy Spirit) and thus His will perfectly aligned with God's.

Proinsias wrote:I don't think you are hearing me. Preference for ice cream is a moral issue

And that, brothers and sisters, is the kind of foolishness you get people who insist on denying biblical theism. A good illustration of any as the length people will go to avoid acknowledging basic truths.

Kurieuo wrote:Mind you, we were talking about Trinitarian doctrine here, closely tied to Christ's identity of course, but does accepting Christ's promise or as a person mean accepting the Trinity as some appear to here believe?

Sure, that's why I said it's sort of an ironic fit. People who want to make explicit belief in the Trinity a part of salvation are putting themselves on the proposition/promise side of that debate.

But, to your point, it doesn't seem to me that we need any knowledge of the Trinity to be saved. My daughter is six, and I have no doubt that she has believed the gospel. She is completely confused when she tries to think about what it might mean that Jesus is God and that the Father is God but that they aren't the same person. She doesn't know the word "Trinity" (except as the name of a school her friend goes to). And I bet a LOT of Christians haven't gotten much beyond her understanding of things. In fact, I find when I really start to pin people down on their theology--talking about serious, Bible believing folk here who claim to believe in the Trinity--that almost everyone has some Trinity related heresy in their mind somewhere. They're either implicit modalists or implicit tritheists. That doesn't keep them from being saved!

So I would break this down two ways. First, to leave aside the Trinity as an explanation, I ask people to first believe five points that the Bible is clear on:

1. There is only one God
2. There is a Person called the Father who is God
3. There is a Person called the Son who is God
4. There is a Person called the Holy Spirit who is God
5. The Father is not the Son or the Holy Spirit, and the Son is not the Holy Spirit

If you believe all five of those things, then if you start to work it out, you'll end up with something like the Trinity. And ultimately, the Trinity is really nothing more than an explanation of how all five of those statements can be held to be true. Strictly, then, the Trinity is the explanation of the biblical data. I don't think anyone needs to understand the explanation of any biblical idea in order to believe the idea in the first place! Therefore, it's silly, to me, to suggest that we have to believe in the Trinity, per se, to be saved.

The second thing, then, relates to what we must know or believe to be saved. I do think we have to have some sort of idea that Jesus is God. You have to have some idea of what He did--the death, burial, and resurrection. You have to have some idea of the atonement. You have to have some idea that you are entrusting yourself to Him to save you from you sins, from Hell. In short, you have to trust that He is your savior. And in light of that, you clearly need to believe that there is a God and that there is a person called the Father who is God. But do you need to believe that there is a person called the Holy Spirit who is God? Do you need to believe that the three persons are all distinct from one another? No, I don't think so. So if a person is a binitarian who denies the personhood and thus deity of the Holy Spirit, I'm not going to say that they are a heretic going to hell. But if a person denies the deity of Christ and says He is only a prophet, then I'll simply say that they don't believe the gospel at present. After all, the gospel requires us to believe in Jesus Christ, and if Jesus is God and you don't believe that, since that is His core identity, then you can't really say you put your faith in Him, now can you?

Proinsias wrote:I don't think you are hearing me. Preference for ice cream is a moral issue

And that, brothers and sisters, is the kind of foolishness you get people who insist on denying biblical theism. A good illustration of any as the length people will go to avoid acknowledging basic truths.

Kurieuo wrote:I'm not sure whether you actually covered my questions ACB or just skirted around them. Let me add though, Christ said in the synoptics to let the children come to Him, that one must accept Christ like a child to enter the kingdom of heaven.

Matt 19:13-14

Then some children were brought to Him so that He might lay His hands on them and pray; and the disciples rebuked them. But Jesus said, “Let the children alone, and do not hinder them from coming to Me; for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”

Luke 18:15-17

15And they were bringing even their babies to Him so that He would touch them, but when the disciples saw it, they began rebuking them. 16But Jesus called for them, saying, “Permit the children to come to Me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. 17“Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it at all.”

Mark 10:13-15

13And they were bringing children to Him so that He might touch them; but the disciples rebuked them. 14But when Jesus saw this, He was indignant and said to them, “Permit the children to come to Me; do not hinder them; for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. 15“Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it at all.”

Now, I can tell with my own children, they don't fully understand who Christ is, they don't get the Gospel really... I poke and prod them with questions so I know they're unclear on many things. Yet, I can tell my 8yo daughter is very open to God and fully loves Christ for some reason I can't explain.

Did the Scripture not answer your question?
"that one must accept Christ like a child to enter the kingdom of heaven. "
You needn't be afraid for your children. God is not a retard not allowing the child to Heaven (in case, God forbid, the child dies) simply because the child could not fully understand and therefore accept Christ.

Don't indoctrinate them, eh? I remember my theology teacher telling me how he didn't mention God and is simply patiently waiting for his daughter to ask questions herself.
She has had Confirmation not long ago....
Then there is this other guy who prays with his daughters jointly every night.
So, yeah, there are different approaches, I suppose.
Which one did you take?

There is no neutral ground. Once one understands that, then whatever one does is allowing one's children to be indoctrinated into something.

I do not understand someone who believes the most important truth possible in life, and then gives in to the false "political correctness" of society which says you ought to not impart what you believe to be true into your children.

Such suggests to me that such a person is very confused and/or don't truly believe what they believe is truth. If Christian beliefs, then they're committing one of the greatest evils possible in not teaching their children such truths which they believe would have eternal consequences, the ultimate Truth in this life that matters for us. Everything else is just buying our time really, or should be a work out of love for God and others.

That said, my methods are no doubt different from many. My wife had a go at me for not giving my daughter the answer to the question, "can God create a rock so big that He can't lift?" My daughter was smart, and asked her mother the same question I asked her. It obviously perplexed her, if God can lift the rock then God can't created a rock big enough, but if God can't lift the rock then He is still unable to do something. So then, after my wife raised some concern , I had another talk about logical contradictions to my daughter. She now has an understanding of what a contradiction is, where something is both 'A' and 'not A', she came up with her own like "Can you hold a mountain while not holding a mountain." You know, prefix God into it, "Can God hold a mountain while not holding a mountain." and we have the same "rock so big can't lift" question. Such is a contradiction, and just because we can string a sentence of words together doesn't mean it means anything at all. Such is really just nonsense talk. May as well be gibberish. Can God jlkhsadkujayuhgsdkj? Oh he can't jlkhsadkujayuhgsdkj? Well then, God isn't all-powerful.

So then, I guide and teach my children correctly, as I see they're ready. I will also allow them to be saturated in Christianity at the Christian school they attend (not all Christian schools mind you are healthy Christianity-wise, I pulled her out from one), church and what-not. But, evidently, rationality and having reasons are important so I'll pose questions to burst bubbles and guide them to think deeply. They don't need to think much more deeply though, since complaints from secular socieity are often superficial or shallow. God's blessed me with my children to raise them as godly people, and in the Way they should go. If I can't impart the Gospel to my children then who can I take it to? Human society might deem me immoral, but in the end I'll stand justified, hopefully beside all my children, before God who is true.

Hebrews 12:2-3 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith;who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross,despising the shame,and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

2nd Corinthians 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not,lest the light of this glorious gospel of Christ,who is the image of God,should shine unto them.

jac wrote:
The second thing, then, relates to what we must know or believe to be saved. I do think we have to have some sort of idea that Jesus is God. You have to have some idea of what He did--the death, burial, and resurrection. You have to have some idea of the atonement. You have to have some idea that you are entrusting yourself to Him to save you from you sins, from Hell. In short, you have to trust that He is your savior. And in light of that, you clearly need to believe that there is a God and that there is a person called the Father who is God. But do you need to believe that there is a person called the Holy Spirit who is God? Do you need to believe that the three persons are all distinct from one another? No, I don't think so. So if a person is a binitarian who denies the personhood and thus deity of the Holy Spirit, I'm not going to say that they are a heretic going to hell. But if a person denies the deity of Christ and says He is only a prophet, then I'll simply say that they don't believe the gospel at present. After all, the gospel requires us to believe in Jesus Christ, and if Jesus is God and you don't believe that, since that is His core identity, then you can't really say you put your faith in Him, now can you?

That's exactly what I believe. And that's where my line of questioning was going.

Thanks for summing it up beautifully Jac.

1 Corinthians 1:99 God is faithful, through whom you were called into fellowship with His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.

Audie wrote:
"Christianity is not a joke, but it has some very poor representatives."

RickD wrote:
Where in scripture is believing in the Trinity a prerequisite for salvation, or being a Christian?
...
But what if one believes Christ is God, but has an issue with the Holy Spirit being the third person? I just don't see that one has to believe the Holy Spirit is a person, in order to be saved.

These are two passages of Scripture that popped into my head when I read your post.

Matthew 12:30-32

30 “Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters. 31 And so I tell you, every kind of sin and slander can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. 32 Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.

Romans 8:9-11

9 You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ. 10 But if Christ is in you, then even though your body is subject to death because of sin, the Spirit gives life because of righteousness. 11 And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of his Spirit who lives in you.

In Christ

What I'm getting at, is does one need to have an understanding of the Holy Spirit being a person in the Trinity, in order to be saved? For example, one believes that Jesus Christ is God, and trusts in him for salvation. And while one believes in the personhood of God the Father, and believes in the personhood of Christ the Son, and believes that the Holy Spirit is the spirit of God, but the Holy Spirit is not a person, can that person be saved.

I would say yes. And it also answers the question that I asked, "If someone doesn't believe in the Trinity, can he be saved?"

I think it depends if a person can be saved if they reject the trinity. I'm not just trying to be different or be contentious,but yes it is true that we must believe in Jesus to be saved,but let's say your at church and the preacher in his sermon was teaching on the trinity and you felt the conviction of the Holy Spirit to be saved but you could not accept the trinity? I'm not sure a person could be saved. You must really believe to be saved,not just some,and it is not hard at all to believe,but I think you'd have to believe it. However,let's say you'd never heard teaching on the trinity and believed in Jesus then you could be saved. I'm not trying to be argumentative and I'm even kind of wondering if I'm right. I'm pretty sure I am,but maybe not. Would faith of a mustard seed apply to salvation or mountains in our life? Is there something else I've overlooked? It is a good question.

Hebrews 12:2-3 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith;who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross,despising the shame,and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

2nd Corinthians 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not,lest the light of this glorious gospel of Christ,who is the image of God,should shine unto them.

RickD wrote:
Where in scripture is believing in the Trinity a prerequisite for salvation, or being a Christian?
...
But what if one believes Christ is God, but has an issue with the Holy Spirit being the third person? I just don't see that one has to believe the Holy Spirit is a person, in order to be saved.

These are two passages of Scripture that popped into my head when I read your post.

Matthew 12:30-32

30 “Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters. 31 And so I tell you, every kind of sin and slander can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. 32 Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.

Romans 8:9-11

9 You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ. 10 But if Christ is in you, then even though your body is subject to death because of sin, the Spirit gives life because of righteousness. 11 And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of his Spirit who lives in you.

In Christ

What I'm getting at, is does one need to have an understanding of the Holy Spirit being a person in the Trinity, in order to be saved? For example, one believes that Jesus Christ is God, and trusts in him for salvation. And while one believes in the personhood of God the Father, and believes in the personhood of Christ the Son, and believes that the Holy Spirit is the spirit of God, but the Holy Spirit is not a person, can that person be saved.

I would say yes. And it also answers the question that I asked, "If someone doesn't believe in the Trinity, can he be saved?"

I think it depends if a person can be saved if they reject the trinity. I'm not just trying to be different or be contentious,but yes it is true that we must believe in Jesus to be saved,but let's say your at church and the preacher in his sermon was teaching on the trinity and you felt the conviction of the Holy Spirit to be saved but you could not accept the trinity? I'm not sure a person could be saved. You must really believe to be saved,not just some,and it is not hard at all to believe,but I think you'd have to believe it. However,let's say you'd never heard teaching on the trinity and believed in Jesus then you could be saved. I'm not trying to be argumentative and I'm even kind of wondering if I'm right. I'm pretty sure I am,but maybe not. Would faith of a mustard seed apply to salvation or mountains in our life? Is there something else I've overlooked? It is a good question.

"For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him and does not reject the the deity of the Holy Spirit and that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are three distinct persons even though there is only one God and so they therefore all share the same nature will not perish, but has everlasting life."

There you go, ACB. I helped you fix John 3:16. You might want to let Jesus know that you've helped Him clarify what He really meant!

You know, it really is a good thing that God has us Christians around to help make sure people don't just think they can believe the actual words of God. He's got to be breathing a sigh of relief. It's not like the Bible has an "edit post" button, after all. That's our job! We edit the Bible to fix God's little mistakes. I'm sure He'll be very pleased with how we helped people ignore what He said and focus on the REAL meaning of the text!

Proinsias wrote:I don't think you are hearing me. Preference for ice cream is a moral issue

And that, brothers and sisters, is the kind of foolishness you get people who insist on denying biblical theism. A good illustration of any as the length people will go to avoid acknowledging basic truths.

RickD wrote:
Where in scripture is believing in the Trinity a prerequisite for salvation, or being a Christian?
...
But what if one believes Christ is God, but has an issue with the Holy Spirit being the third person? I just don't see that one has to believe the Holy Spirit is a person, in order to be saved.

These are two passages of Scripture that popped into my head when I read your post.

Matthew 12:30-32

30 “Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters. 31 And so I tell you, every kind of sin and slander can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. 32 Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.

Romans 8:9-11

9 You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ. 10 But if Christ is in you, then even though your body is subject to death because of sin, the Spirit gives life because of righteousness. 11 And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of his Spirit who lives in you.

In Christ

What I'm getting at, is does one need to have an understanding of the Holy Spirit being a person in the Trinity, in order to be saved? For example, one believes that Jesus Christ is God, and trusts in him for salvation. And while one believes in the personhood of God the Father, and believes in the personhood of Christ the Son, and believes that the Holy Spirit is the spirit of God, but the Holy Spirit is not a person, can that person be saved.

I would say yes. And it also answers the question that I asked, "If someone doesn't believe in the Trinity, can he be saved?"

I think it depends if a person can be saved if they reject the trinity. I'm not just trying to be different or be contentious,but yes it is true that we must believe in Jesus to be saved,but let's say your at church and the preacher in his sermon was teaching on the trinity and you felt the conviction of the Holy Spirit to be saved but you could not accept the trinity? I'm not sure a person could be saved. You must really believe to be saved,not just some,and it is not hard at all to believe,but I think you'd have to believe it. However,let's say you'd never heard teaching on the trinity and believed in Jesus then you could be saved. I'm not trying to be argumentative and I'm even kind of wondering if I'm right. I'm pretty sure I am,but maybe not. Would faith of a mustard seed apply to salvation or mountains in our life? Is there something else I've overlooked? It is a good question.

"For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him and does not reject the the deity of the Holy Spirit and that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are three distinct persons even though there is only one God and so they therefore all share the same nature will not perish, but has everlasting life."

There you go, ACB. I helped you fix John 3:16. You might want to let Jesus know that you've helped Him clarify what He really meant!

You know, it really is a good thing that God has us Christians around to help make sure people don't just think they can believe the actual words of God. He's got to be breathing a sigh of relief. It's not like the Bible has an "edit post" button, after all. That's our job! We edit the Bible to fix God's little mistakes. I'm sure He'll be very pleased with how we helped people ignore what He said and focus on the REAL meaning of the text!

Re-read what I said. I was not trying to argue. That was not my intention at all. I feel like I was set up kinda for a swearing honestly,even when I made it clear I was not trying to be contentious. I did not twist or add to John 3:16. I actually agreed with you but wanted us to consider something.

Hebrews 12:2-3 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith;who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross,despising the shame,and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

2nd Corinthians 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not,lest the light of this glorious gospel of Christ,who is the image of God,should shine unto them.